Tough Newshttp://toughnews.com
A Place for Conservatives and Liberals to Air Their Politically Incorrect Thoughts, Views and Opinions!Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:17:45 +0000enhourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1This Obumer Hangover Just Won’t Go Awayhttp://toughnews.com/?p=1013
http://toughnews.com/?p=1013#commentsFri, 16 Feb 2018 21:17:45 +0000Dr. Robert Owenshttp://toughnews.com/?p=1013One of the primary accusations against President Nixon that caused him to resign was that even though he was never shown to be personally aware of any abuses committed in his name he fostered an environment that encouraged such behavior.

The truth is finally seeing the light of day. And what do we see? That President Obama was if not personally complicit in the growing list of abuses exposed he set the tone and offered cover for his minions as they ran amuck trashing the FBI, the CIA, the IRS, FISA, and any other agency that could advance his transformative agenda, secure the nomination for Hillary, and thwart Trump’s nomination, election, and administration.

The weaponization of these powerful government agencies shows an administration determined to steal first a primary then an election. So far emails and messages implicate James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe, Andrew Weissmann, Sally Yates, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr.

Tom Del Beccaro, an attorney and contributor to Forbes said, “Holistic analysis of the Justice Department (DOJ) and FBI’s interconnected and ostensible investigations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump amount to the worst abuse of political power in American history related to elections.’ And “The DOJ [and] the entire Obama administration wound down the Hillary email crisis in time for her to really run for office and then ramped up the attacks on candidate Trump to stop him from being president.”

As quoted in an article by Robert Kraychik posted in Breitbart Del Beccaro continues, “The FBI was sort of just going through the motions with Hillary, and it’s about March or April, and suddenly the election heats up, and Obama goes on TV, and he says, with Chris Wallace, basically, that she didn’t intend to do anything [wrong]; she didn’t want to harm us,” said Del Beccaro. “That’s irrelevant to the crime she committed of possessing classified information in an insecure environment. So he announces this, and once he does, the DOJ and the FBI then change their speed [of] work and the manner in which they’re working, the things that they’re doing, and between April and June, they exonerate her, and what I mean by that is they change the language in the memo as to whether she was doing something wrong from ‘gross negligence’ of a crime to … ‘extreme carelessness.’

That’s irrelevant. That’s not legal language: ‘extreme carelessness.’”
As his evaluation of the situation continued Del Beccaro stated, “Early May, [Obama] endorses her, [and] it’s very rare in our history for a president to endorse in a divided primary within his own party,” said Del Beccaro. “If there wasn’t a sham investigation going on, why would he take a risk endorsing a candidate under investigation by the FBI when on its face she broke the law? His first appearance with her [was] on the afternoon of July 5. You know what happened on the morning of July 5? James Comey goes on TV to exonerate her. This cannot be coincidental.”

“Seems pretty much like they knew what they were doing to me, don’t you think?” asked Del Beccaro, rhetorically.

In what may soon be a growing chorus Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) has called for a second special counsel to investigate abuse at the Department of Justice and the FBI. This seems like a no-brainer since in any honest or realistic scenario it is obvious that the FBI and the DOJ cannot investigate themselves.

When on Fox News Channel’s “Watters’ World” Gaetz was asked if given Sessions’ recusal he had the authority to appoint such a special counsel. Rep. Gaetz answered, “Of course, he does,” Gaetz replied. “There was no legal obligation for that recusal, and frankly, I don’t even know what the four corners of that recusal are. Here, the accusation is not against Russia. It is against the very agency that Jeff Sessions leads, the Department of Justice, and then some of the senior politicized leadership at the FBI. So he could appoint that special counsel. More than two dozen Republicans have joined me in calling for it, and it is darn time that it happened.”

Now is the time to demand accountability. Let the chips fall where they may. It certainly appears as if these wannabe banana boat authoritarians were attempting to corrupt our election process. They succeeded against Bernie. However, once they failed in the general election they are now attempting to orchestrate a coup against the sitting President.

We cannot allow this to happen. We must let our representatives and senators know we want a Special Counsel to investigate these abuses. You can use this link to find out how to contact your representatives and senators. Let them know We the People want our country back, we want to drain the swamp, and we want anyone no matter how high prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for trying to undermine our Republic.

]]>http://toughnews.com/?feed=rss2&p=10130The Second Amendment Means What It Sayshttp://toughnews.com/?p=1011
http://toughnews.com/?p=1011#commentsThu, 08 Feb 2018 22:40:08 +0000Dr. Robert Owenshttp://toughnews.com/?p=1011In the words of AWR Hawkins in Breitbart “When the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791 the phrase, ‘well-regulated militia,’ underlined the importance of the words, ‘shall not be infringed.’”
The Second Amendment says, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

It must be remembered that the shot heard round the world which ignited the Revolution was fought by local militias at Lexington and Concord standing strong against the regular army troops of the greatest empire in the world. Without those militias and the privately held guns that made them possible there would have been no Revolution. Because without those militias and the privately held guns that made them possible the colonists would have had no means to resist the tyranny of the king.

To rightly understand the meaning of the Second Amendment first we need to understand, “What is the meaning of a militia.” In the majority opinion for District of Columbia v Heller (2008), Justice Antonin Scalia explained:

Unlike armies and navies, which Congress is given the power to create (“to raise . . . Armies”; “to provide . . . a Navy,” Art. I, §8, cls. 12–13), the militia is assumed by Article I already to be in existence. Congress is given the power to “provide for calling forth the militia,” §8, cl. 15; and the power not to create, but to “organiz[e]” it—and not to organize “a” militia, which is what one would expect if the militia were to be a federal creation, but to organize “the” militia, connoting a body already in existence, ibid., cl. 16. This is fully consistent with the ordinary definition of the militia as all able-bodied men. From that pool, Congress has plenary power to organize the units that will make up an effective fighting force.

We also need to examine what the Founders and Framers meant when they spoke of a militia. When to attempting to explain that the American citizenry had within itself the authority to band together for purposes of repelling tyranny James Madison in Federalist 46 he clearly stated that “ultimate authority… resides in the people alone.”

That he meant this as a guarantee to the people of the means with which to resist tyranny on the part of the government is clear when he goes on to say, “Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger.”

Here’s what President Trump has to say on the subject:

The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.

The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right that belongs to all law-abiding Americans. The Constitution doesn’t create that right it ensures that the government can’t take it away. Our Founding Fathers knew, and our Supreme Court has upheld, that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to guarantee our right to defend ourselves and our families. This is about self-defense, plain and simple.

It’s been said that the Second Amendment is America’s first freedom. That’s because the Right to Keep and Bear Arms protects all our other rights. We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment. Protecting that freedom is imperative.

Gun and magazine bans are a total failure. That’s been proven every time it’s been tried. Opponents of gun rights try to come up with scary sounding phrases like “assault weapons”, “military-style weapons” and “high capacity magazines” to confuse people. What they’re really talking about are popular semi-automatic rifles and standard magazines that are owned by tens of millions of Americans. Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own.

The right of self-defense doesn’t stop at the end of your driveway. That’s why I have a concealed carry permit and why tens of millions of Americans do too. That permit should be valid in all 50 states. A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving which is a privilege, not a right then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

I don’t know about you but I have been waiting to hear an American leader say these things for my whole life.